You've Reincarnated Mega OP Into a Fantasy World And You Want To Abolish Injustice

[Yorda]

Half of you people probably played Metal Gear Solid V.

What's metal gear
why would you think people played it

 

[BenJepheneT]

What's metal gear
why would you think people played it

Well, judging from the answers you're getting it's very reminiscent of Venom Snake getting booted into Afghanistan and purging them from Militias while indoctrinating them into his own Militia (Outer Heaven).

I'd probably never consider purging injustice in Isekai. The worlds are probably different from our moral perspective. What is considered totally terrible might just be Tuesday to them. Maybe the slaves don't really give a shit about being slaves. Maybe the peasants do enjoy the life of being absolutely fucken poor. Maybe doing "good" will make you the villain. It's like trying to bring angels to hell.

Who knows. If it were me I'll try to live my life as down and hidden as possible. Might be boring and uninspired, but I rather not become the alien kaiju disrupting their peace.

 

[Yorda]

Well, judging from the answers you're getting it's very reminiscent of Venom Snake getting booted into Afghanistan and purging them from Militias while indoctrinating them into his own Militia (Outer Heaven).

I'd probably never consider purging injustice in Isekai. The worlds are probably different from our moral perspective. What is considered totally terrible might just be Tuesday to them. Maybe the slaves don't really give a shit about being slaves. Maybe the peasants do enjoy the life of being absolutely fucken poor. Maybe doing "good" will make you the villain. It's like trying to bring angels to hell.

Who knows. If it were me I'll try to live my life as down and hidden as possible. Might be boring and uninspired, but I rather not become the alien kaiju disrupting their peace.

That's why I said that some of the slaves wouldn't want to take part in my self-righteous social experiment. I also had the same feeling that I might wind up inappropriately and selfishly imposing my beliefs on another world. In the end, I really don't think I could turn a blind eye to the misery and suffering. I would have a lot of empathy for the downtrodden.

Edit: I'd certainly be an alien existence in their world, but for the sake of saving people who are unfairly suffering I would impose.

 

[Kyrian_Clawraithe]

The power that I would insist upon getting if I was Isekaied is one based on technological growth. What I would do if I found an injustice is I would create a technological solution.

For instance, prejudice is because someone can't understand the others. I would make a technology to simulate a life in the shoes of someone who is a victim of prejudice hide this inside of a game or something else that would be appealing to the target and advertise it to them in such a way that they think that it is their choice to use it. This creates a foundation for them to emphasize with the others, which leads to less amounts of prejudice and that leads to better interactions.

 

[BenJepheneT]

Edit: I'd certainly be an alien existence in their world, but for the sake of saving people who are unfairly suffering I would impose.

Call me a coward or a pussy, but I rather just watch and intervene when it involves me

 

[ForestDweller]

a more or less flat income tax rate, an enforced maximum wealth gap

Ooh boy, as someone who knows a little about economics, that's a can of worms right there.

 

[Yorda]

Ooh boy, as someone who knows a little about economics, that's a can of worms right there.

I was trying to look for some data on this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality

It's hard to glean general trends, but here's what I've noticed.

(1) Almost all European countries tend towards greater income equality.
(2) Almost all countries with the largest wealth gap have had problems with extreme violence, civil war, corruption, and extreme poverty.
(3) Most of the countries with the highest GDP fall somewhere between the middle of income equality to the most income equality. The two major outliers are China and the US.
(4) More of the countries with largest wealth gaps have poor GDP per capita. US is the most notable outlier, and uhhh maybe Singapore and Hong Kong.

Rather than wealth gap being a determining factor for national wealth I now believe that other factors affect an country's economy much more. Factors with more influence on economic strength are military power, population, landmass, natural resources, educational standards, nationalism, technology, merchantilism, manufacturing, industrialization, and competitiveness.

It's true that implementation of some control on wealth gap would be tricky, but it would not devastate an economy depending on how it was implemented, especially if it was implemented from the start rather than imposed on an already developed country. However, you also took it out of context. It isn't just "flat income tax rate, an enforced maximum wealth gap" there was also universal basic income and strong labour laws.

Rather than 'enforce' it might be better to simply make policy changes that are conducive towards preventing a wealth gap from getting bad. I define bad as, "The wealthy have a heavily disproportionate influence over politics that opens the gates to corruption and vested interests." Huh, now that I've thought this all out the data leads me to the conclusion that the a major purpose of income tax brackets is to put controls on wealth gap, and that variation/change of income tax brackets is a tool to aid the economy.

A problem that I'm experiencing here is that I might be focusing on the method when the desired results are the important part. Income tax brackets don't appear to be enough on their own though, and it would be very hard to implement into a fantasy world due to lack of government structure, citizen data, and bookkeeping: it's hard to keep tabs on all citizens if the technology level is low in a fantasy world. This is making me think about roman tax collectors ...

You can be part of my 'power base' if you want. It's good to have second opinions that challenge my offhand remarks and oversights. Combined input invariably leads to better solutions.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

Just my grain of salt, op is boring. Every idiot wannabe armchair general can be successful. No matter how stupid they are, the MC won't be punished for the mistakes. No challenge = boring.

 

[YuriDoggo]

Just my grain of salt, op is boring. Every idiot wannabe armchair general can be successful. No matter how stupid they are, the MC won't be punished for the mistakes. No challenge = boring.

zzzzzzz

Except this entire thread is outlining the challenges of maintaining your own morality while still changing the world. As long as the problem can't be solved with pure force, OP is meaningless except for basic power projection and the inability to be assassinated. You still have to enact changes.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

zzzzzzz

Except this entire thread is outlining the challenges of maintaining your own morality while still changing the world. As long as the problem can't be solved with pure force, OP is meaningless except for basic power projection and the inability to be assassinated. You still have to enact changes.

Tssssssss, morality. For postmodernists morality is a purely academic question. You will be a godlike figure surrounded by yesmen. There is no morality, because you are the morality.

 

[YuriDoggo]

Tssssssss, morality. For postmodernists morality is a purely academic question. You will be a godlike figure surrounded by yesmen. There is no morality, because you are the morality.

Oh right, how could I have missed that.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

Oh right, how could I have missed that.

Your sarcasm is thick, my friend.

 

[binarysoap]

I'm surprised no one mentioned the simplest way to abolish injustice

Kill everyone. There can be no injustice is everyone is dead.

 

[YuriDoggo]

I'm surprised no one mentioned the simplest way to abolish injustice

Kill everyone. There can be no injustice is everyone is dead.

It was a hard question because every single immediate and forceful method I thought of pretty much results in large casualties. Also, there are also moral issues with relying on force that would have reprecussions far into the future. Thus I have turned to you, other people with other ideas, to save the day! It was stated somewhere that group input usually results in a more rational decision making process than a single person making all decisions alone (prevention of gross oversight).

Context clues from the literal opening post should tell you why you should not be surprised.

 

[Yorda]

I'm surprised no one mentioned the simplest way to abolish injustice

Kill everyone. There can be no injustice is everyone is dead.

Kill nearly everyone, but leave a few survivors and reform civilization from the very beginning.

 

[binarysoap]

Context clues from the literal opening post should tell you why you should not be surprised.

It was not a serious answer. Although I assume you know that. Although you do have to wonder, does killing some people here and there to solve injustice, justified?

 

[YuriDoggo]

It was not a serious answer. Although I assume you know that. Although you do have to wonder, does killing some people here and there to solve injustice, justified?

Not legally. Morally? To you it's justified, but not to the murdered and their associates.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

It was not a serious answer. Although I assume you know that. Although you do have to wonder, does killing some people here and there to solve injustice, justified?

Always think, what would a Nietzschean Übermensch do?

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

Not legally. Morally? To you it's justified, but not to the murdered and their associates.

According to which law I ask? Divine law? Natural law? The law of the US? As legal positivism tells us, laws are a human creation.

 

[Yorda]

Just my grain of salt, op is boring. Every idiot wannabe armchair general can be successful. No matter how stupid they are, the MC won't be punished for the mistakes. No challenge = boring.

LOL

What a biting but true comment. Many things would work out due to brute force, even dumb ideas ... I think the majority of human beings are not qualified to govern or rule. Even the ones that are fairly competent with some applicable knowledge still likely fall short, but they might still be a better option than random monarchs, dictators, etc. I'm sure that I would make horrific mistakes if left to my own devices. So everybody needs advisors and many diverse opinions just like this thread is providing.

This whole thread stinks of armchair generals. (I'm also guilty) LOL

Come and be an armchair general with us A2!

Except this entire thread is outlining the challenges of maintaining your own morality while still changing the world. As long as the problem can't be solved with pure force, OP is meaningless except for basic power projection and the inability to be assassinated. You still have to enact changes.

Stress inducing nightmare. Too easy to just become a tyrant.

Tssssssss, morality. For postmodernists morality is a purely academic question. You will be a godlike figure surrounded by yesmen. There is no morality, because you are the morality.

A very real problem. Yes-men. A possible solution to this is a 'power base' filled with loyal people who aren't all yes-men. Depravity might be only an inch away for people who have no limits to their power.

I have indeed mentioned that in the end an OP person would probably wind up imposing their biased and self-righteous morality on a foreign world. It's almost unavoidable even if the person in question believes otherwise.